In a book, if the [Here's the passage:] is at the end of the
page, and the next page is just the RHS (Right-Hand-Side), then
the badness is minimal (?)

but if the [Here's the passage:] is at the end of the
page, and i have to flip the Page to see the quotation,
it's pretty bad.
------ Is this avoided in all the printed books?

Does LaTeX provide an easy , standard way to avoid this?

(i know that LaTeX avoids putting Section, Subsection...
header at the end of a page.... that'd look SO bad!)

__________________________

Wow! Back then (in Old England), did ordinary folks use the verb
[translate] in the following way? Did educated folks use the
verb [translate] consistently in this way? Here's the actual
passage from KJV:
By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death;
and was not found, because God had translated him: for
before his translation he had this testimony, that he
pleased God.

------- here it means (seems to mean) the same thing as [Relocate]

i'd love to see a usage example, e.g. from F.Bacon or Shak

(Thanks (Mr.UD) for the response--- i'm slowing digesting it)

Fri, 19 Jul 2024 15:39:35 -0700: HenHanna <HenHanna@devnull.tb>
scribeva:
> In a book, if the [Here's the passage:] is at the end of the
>page, and the next page is just the RHS (Right-Hand-Side), then
>the badness is minimal (?)
>
> but if the [Here's the passage:] is at the end of the
>page, and i have to flip the Page to see the quotation,
>it's pretty bad.
> ------ Is this avoided in all the printed books?

There's a term for that, something with widows or orphans? Yeah:
https://www.herronprinting.com/resources/the-ideas-collection/all-alone-and-misunderstood-widows-orphans-runts-and-rivers/

(Includes the crazy modern "light grey on white" no contrast bad
readability fashion.)

>Does LaTeX provide an easy , standard way to avoid this?

Dunno, I don't do printed pages, only wegpages.

Sat, 20 Jul 2024 07:17:08 +0200: Ruud Harmsen <rh@rudhar.com>
scribeva:

>Fri, 19 Jul 2024 15:39:35 -0700: HenHanna <HenHanna@devnull.tb>
>scribeva:
>> In a book, if the [Here's the passage:] is at the end of the
>>page, and the next page is just the RHS (Right-Hand-Side), then
>>the badness is minimal (?)
>>
>> but if the [Here's the passage:] is at the end of the
>>page, and i have to flip the Page to see the quotation,
>>it's pretty bad.
>> ------ Is this avoided in all the printed books?
>
>There's a term for that, something with widows or orphans? Yeah:
>https://www.herronprinting.com/resources/the-ideas-collection/all-alone-and-misunderstood-widows-orphans-runts-and-rivers/

English "runt" by the way is interesting where the etymology is
concerned. Perhaps from Dutch rund = cow, which can also mean "stupid
person".

Slogan:
Je bent een rund als je met vuurwerk stunt.

>(Includes the crazy modern "light grey on white" no contrast bad
>readability fashion.)
>
>>Does LaTeX provide an easy , standard way to avoid this?
>
>Dunno, I don't do printed pages, only wegpages.

On 7/19/2024 3:39 PM, HenHanna wrote:
>
>       In a book, if the [Here's the passage:]  is at the end of the
> page, and the next page is just the RHS (Right-Hand-Side), then
> the badness is minimal (?)
>
>        but if the [Here's the passage:]  is at the end of the
> page, and i have to flip the Page to see the quotation,
> it's pretty bad.
>                 ------ Is this avoided in all the printed books?
>
>
> Does  LaTeX   provide an easy , standard way to avoid this?
>
>
>           (i know that  LaTeX  avoids putting  Section, Subsection...
>               header  at the end of a page.... that'd look SO bad!)
>
>
> __________________________
>
> Wow!    Back then (in Old England), did ordinary folks use the verb
> [translate] in the following way?         Did educated folks use the
> verb [translate] consistently in this way?   Here's the actual
> passage from KJV:
>             By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death;
>             and was not found, because God had translated him: for
>             before his translation he had this testimony, that he
>             pleased God.
>
> ------- here it means (seems to mean) the same thing as [Relocate]
>
>             i'd love to see a usage example, e.g. from F.Bacon or Shak
>
>
> (Thanks (Mr.UD) for the response--- i'm slowing digesting it)

thanks for the tip... i 'll check the book
[The Elements of Typographical Style]

On 19/07/2024 23:39, HenHanna wrote:

> In a book, if the [Here's the passage:] is at the end of the page,
> and the next page is just the RHS (Right-Hand-Side), then the badness
> is minimal (?)

Nothing to do with TeX's badness, just an artifact of how the text falls.

> but if the [Here's the passage:] is at the end of the page, and i
> have to flip the Page to see the quotation, it's pretty bad. ------
> Is this avoided in all the printed books?

Yes, if you have a good editor and compositor.

> Does LaTeX provide an easy , standard way to avoid this?

No, because it's very uncommon. I use two rules:

1. WAIT until ALL editing and changes have been made and the document is
static. THEN go back and check on this kind of problem. It is futile to
work on this while the document is still being written, or being edited
or updated, because that will change where the paragraphs fall.

2. IFF the problem still exists, you can break off the final line of the
page and force it to the top of the next page. This is usually Very Bad
Practice (two lines would be more acceptable). Add this to your Preamble:

\newcommand{\breakpage}{%
\begingroup\parfillskip0pt\par\endgroup
\newpage\noindent\ignorespaces}

Then check in the PDF for the word that starts to line where you want to
break the page, find that in your source text, and insert \breakpage
before it. Don't forget that this will move the text on the next page
down, and probably the following page[s] until the end of the chapter or
section.

> (i know that LaTeX avoids putting Section, Subsection... header
> at the end of a page.... that'd look SO bad!)

Right.

> Wow! Back then (in Old England), did ordinary folks use the verb
> [translate] in the following way? Did educated folks use the verb
> [translate] consistently in this way?

Translate comes from the Latin for to carry over or carry across. In
religious writing it seems to be used with a special meaning of the soul
making the journey "across" to paradise without the body having to
suffer mortal death. Educated folk would understand this, because they
would have learned Latin. Normal folk would have to be taught it: AFAIAA
it was not a part of normal everyday speech, but I'm happy to learn
otherwise. But then today people still say "passed over" or "passed on"
or even just "passed".

> i'd love to see a usage example, e.g. from F.Bacon or Shak

This is what dictionaries are for.

Peter